IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i6p2942-2954.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does social media type matter to politics? Investigating the difference in political participation depending on preferred social media sites

Author

Listed:
  • Cheonsoo Kim
  • Soobum Lee

Abstract

Objective This study investigates the relationship between social media use for information and political participation with the type of social media as a moderator to shed light on platform‐specific biases related to political participation. To this end, social media sites were classified into two types: symmetrical and asymmetrical,based on their functional characteristics that affect the way users form a relationship on the site Methods Using data from a U.S. national survey, we test a theoretical model where the path from social media use for information through online political participation to offline political participation is moderated differently by users’ preference for the type of social media. Results Online political participation mediated the relationship between social media use for information and offline political participation. Users’ preference for symmetrical social media moderated the path from social media use for information through online political participation to offline political participation, whereas users’ preference for asymmetrical social media did not. Conclusion All else being equal, the more often people use symmetrical social media for information, the more likely they are to participate in politics.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheonsoo Kim & Soobum Lee, 2021. "Does social media type matter to politics? Investigating the difference in political participation depending on preferred social media sites," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2942-2954, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2942-2954
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13055
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13055?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2000. "The effect of a nonpartisan get-out-the-vote drive: An experimental study of leafleting," Natural Field Experiments 00247, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Zachary J. Auter & Jeffrey A. Fine, 2018. "Social Media Campaigning: Mobilization and Fundraising on Facebook," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(1), pages 185-200, March.
    3. Huckfeldt, Robert & Sprague, John, 1992. "Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization: Political Structure, Social Structure, and the Party Canvass," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(1), pages 70-86, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cato Waeterloos & Peter Conradie & Michel Walrave & Koen Ponnet, 2021. "Digital Issue Movements: Political Repertoires and Drivers of Participation among Belgian Youth in the Context of ‘School Strike for Climate’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nickerson, David W. & Friedrichs, Ryan D. & King, David, 2004. "Mobilizing the Party Faithful: Results from a Statewide Turnout Experiment in Michigan," Working Paper Series rwp04-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Ryan Friedrichs & David King & David Nickerson, 2004. "Mobilizing the party faithful: Results from a statewide turnout experiment in michigan," Natural Field Experiments 00315, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Per Strömblad & Gunnar Myrberg, 2013. "Urban Inequality and Political Recruitment," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(5), pages 1049-1065, April.
    4. Sidney Verba & Kay L. Schlozman & Henry E. Brady, 2000. "Rational Action and Political Activity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(3), pages 243-268, July.
    5. J. Andrew Harris & Catherine Kamindo & Peter van der Windt, 2020. "Electoral Administration in Fledgling Democracies:Experimental Evidence from Kenya," Working Papers 20200036, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2020.
    6. Anna L. Harvey, 2001. "Partisanship As A Social Convention," Rationality and Society, , vol. 13(4), pages 462-504, November.
    7. Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Waldfogel, Joel, 2005. "Strength in Numbers: Group Size and Political Mobilization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(1), pages 73-91, April.
    8. Traci R. Burch, 2014. "Effects of Imprisonment and Community Supervision on Neighborhood Political Participation in North Carolina," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 651(1), pages 184-201, January.
    9. Kevin Denny & Orla Doyle, 2009. "Does Voting History Matter? Analysing Persistence in Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 17-35, January.
    10. Xavier Giné & Ghazala Mansuri, 2018. "Together We Will: Experimental Evidence on Female Voting Behavior in Pakistan," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 207-235, January.
    11. Peter W. Wielhouwer, 2020. "Resistance and Response: Latinos and Conservative Radio Advertisements," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1513-1533, July.
    12. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2001. "Getting out the youth vote: Results from randomized field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00260, The Field Experiments Website.
    13. Alan Gerber & Donald Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting may be habit forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00251, The Field Experiments Website.
    14. Gäbler, Stefanie & Potrafke, Niklas & Rösel, Felix, 2017. "Compulsory Voting, Voter Turnout and Asymmetrical Habit-formation," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168074, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Felix Oberholzer-Gee & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Electoral Acceleration: The Effect of Minority Population on Minority Voter Turnout," NBER Working Papers 8252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Ricardo Ramírez, 2005. "Giving Voice to Latino Voters: A Field Experiment on the Effectiveness of a National Nonpartisan Mobilization Effort," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 66-84, September.
    17. Andersen, Jørgen Juel & Fiva, Jon H. & Natvik, Gisle James, 2014. "Voting when the stakes are high," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 157-166.
    18. Michael Ensley, 2012. "Incumbent positioning, ideological heterogeneity and mobilization in U.S. House elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 43-61, April.
    19. Edlin, Aaron & Gelman, Andrew & Kaplan, Noah, 2008. "Voting as a Rational Choice," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt0x3780rb, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    20. Aaron Edlin & Andrew Gelman & Noah Kaplan, 2007. "Voting as a Rational Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(3), pages 293-314, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2942-2954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.